It has been five months since the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) quietly enforced its updated guidelines banning/disallowing Video-on-Demand (VOD) as an accredited format for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) programs. The new policy, effective since February 2025, was meant to improve the quality of CPD by emphasizing live interaction and real-time learning. But on the ground—and across the seas—the effects are starting to show, and they are far from ideal.
For many Filipino nurses, both in the Philippines and abroad, the disallowance of VOD has introduced real obstacles to what should be an empowering professional requirement. In large urban centers, where CPD events are more frequently organized and information flows more readily, the changes may have been absorbed with minor adjustments. But in small cities and towns across the country, and especially among overseas Filipino workers, the new guidelines have created confusion, exclusion, and frustration.
The reality is that VOD had long served as an accessible and practical option for busy professionals. It offered flexibility without compromising quality. Nurses could engage with content during their rest days or off-hours, review modules at their own pace, and complete their CPD obligations without sacrificing work or personal time. For many, especially those with erratic schedules or limited physical access to CPD centers, VOD wasn’t a shortcut—it was a necessity.
This is particularly true in the provinces and small cities of the Philippines, where in-person CPD offerings are infrequent, if not completely absent. Nurses in places like Roxas, Bayugan, or Sorsogon are now left scrambling for alternatives, often having to travel long distances or spend additional money (mostly on transport and accommodation) just to attend live sessions. The same holds true for allied health professionals and registered nurses employed in the booming BPO and health information management industries—sectors that operate 24/7, follow foreign time zones, and are filled with licensed professionals who now struggle to meet CPD requirements because their work hours don’t match typical CPD schedules.
Overseas Filipino nurses, meanwhile, have long relied on VOD to stay connected to their home country’s licensure standards. Working across different time zones in countries like Saudi Arabia, the UK, or Canada, they’ve used VOD to continue their professional development while managing rotating shifts, overtime, family and other responsibilities. For them, attending live CPD sessions in Philippine time zones is not just inconvenient—it’s often impossible. The VOD ban now places them in a difficult position: either let their license lapse or endure additional stress and financial burden to comply.
What makes the situation more disheartening is that this policy change, though significant, has not been widely disseminated. Many professionals and even accredited CPD providers were unaware of the change until their applications were rejected or their completed VOD courses were no longer counted. The lack of an effective information campaign has added confusion to an already challenging transition, with nurses left asking: “Why weren’t we told?”
The underlying assumption behind the ban is that real-time interaction leads to better learning outcomes. And while engagement and discussion are undeniably important, they are not exclusive to live sessions. High-quality VOD programs can—and often do—integrate quizzes, self-assessments, learner reflections, and post-course evaluations. In fact, many nurses prefer VOD precisely because it allows them to pause, reflect, rewatch, and digest complex information at their own pace—something not always possible in a live session.
The ban also ignores the gains made during the pandemic, when educational systems worldwide proved that virtual and asynchronous learning could be effective, inclusive, and scalable. It seems counterintuitive, even regressive, to dismiss VOD at a time when digital literacy is at its highest and when flexible learning models are the global norm.
Beyond learning, the ban is already leading to unintended consequences. Nurses and allied health professionals are either delaying their CPD activities, risking non-renewal of their licenses, or being forced to spend money and time they cannot afford to meet the new requirements. Institutions offering VOD-based programs, including those with excellent reputations, are now unable to provide accredited content, creating a bottleneck in supply just as demand continues to grow.
To move forward, a more thoughtful and responsive approach is needed. Rather than eliminating VOD altogether, the PRC could establish clear criteria to distinguish between low-quality and high-quality asynchronous learning in consultation with the community and experts in the field of open and modular-based learning.. Requirements such as embedded assessments, completion tracking, learner feedback/reflection, and proof of comprehension could be enforced to ensure rigor without excluding flexibility.
The system should also acknowledge and accommodate the realities of a modern Filipino nursing workforce—one that is no longer confined to hospital corridors but is also found in global health systems, digital platforms, and telehealth roles. Whether in Manila or Muscat, Iligan or Illinois, Filipino nurses deserve continuing professional development that meets them where they are.
CPD should remain a tool for growth, not a source of stress. It should be accessible, affordable, and inclusive. As it stands now, the VOD ban undermines these goals.
Five months into this policy, it is time to listen to the voices of those affected—to the nurses who work night shifts in BPO hubs, to those who travel hours from small towns to attend live CPD seminars, and to those logging in from across the globe just to maintain the pride of holding a Philippine professional license.
This is not a call for leniency. It is a call for relevance. Let CPD evolve with the times. Let learning remain within reach. Let Filipino nurses—wherever they may be—continue to grow, not be left behind by a system that fails to see them.
This editorial was co-authored by Jerome Babate, RN, MBA, PhD, LCLP (Australia); Michael de Leon, MPH, RN (Poland); and Aris Bungabong, PhD, RN (Philippines).
